About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (February 23, 2022)

handle is hein.amenin/aeiaegc0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Key Points & Progressives argue that uruversai school lurch wouldi reduce paperwork burdens, yield-- ing administrative efficiency oins. But the true cueson roves us far beyond debates over welfare economnis nto the realm of morality. e Universal free lurch would all but certuainy engender a stigma against kids bringing brown lunch bags, crowding out parental food preparation. Beyon d the taxpayer sticker shock, we should far more carefully consider the moral, social, and potentiaily biological costs of universal free school lunch. Who should feed children? Parents or the govern- mnent? Before the pandemic, more than half of Ameri- can public school students were eligible for free or reduced price schoo lunch (V RL).' Sen. Bernie Sanders (1-V) has proposed expanding the pro- gram to pr ide free breakfast, lunch., and dinner to every American public school student.2 Presi- dent Joe tiiden is pushing a more modest reform, lowering the district wide threshold for FRL com - mnurity ehigibiity ao mer a projected 9.7 million more students than it crently does-though this ma'y rose an underestimate. There is a strong ase for governmental provi- sion of food to children whose parents can't----or won't-feed them. But that's not the question at hand. The question is whether the government should feed children whose parents can provide them with the food they need. Conservatives have traditionally argued no, from a fiscal responsibil- ity perspective.4 Progressives counter that univer- sal school luinch would reduce paperwork burdens, yielding administrative efficiency gains.5 But the true question moves us far beyond debates over welfare economics into the realm of morality. Progressives realize this. Hence, their main argument for universal free lunch is that serving all stdenrs every ).eal wii. Fght stig)a.a T'hey note Wat kids who get free lunch sometimes are marde fin. of---or i;neh shamned----y kids who don't.7 They posit that if every student were fed every tneal by their school, then no one could get shamed this way. Let's grant, for the sake of argument, the dubi- ous assumption that universal free lunch, would actually mitigate the absolute amount of buillying----- that kids wouldn't just redistribute social anxiety and social aggression to other pretexts. Is this the only moral axis in play? Or is the exclusive empha- sis on stigma a product of progressive policymak- ing's poor inaaginationr To expand our moral imagination, let's look internationally. S-hools in Switzerland largely do not provide lunch. Rather, students break for two hours midday and generally waik home to be Fed by their parents) The sight of young children walking

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most